Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Armed teacher bill being pushed here in OK

McCullough plans to introduce legislation that would give school
teachers and administrators the right to carry firearms in school. Under
current law in Oklahoma, it is a felony to possess a gun on school
property....And McCullough explained to KOKH’s Marisa Mendelson that parents
shouldn’t worry because teachers would required to get the same type of
Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training (CLEET) certification that police officers have.
So this isn't a 'teachers with carry permits can carry' bill, it's a 'Take LE CLEET training and then you can carry in school' bill.

I just love this objection:Oklahoma parent Tom Jones, however, wasn’t comforted by McCullough’s assurances. “I don’t believe that’s the answer, I really don’t,” Jones insisted.
“I’d have to ask, how are you going to screen the teachers? How do you
know you don’t have a mentally ill person?”
Um, because they've already been through the teacher screening? And if that's not good enough for you, how much more screening should teachers have before they're in the classroom in the first place?

I like this better, personally:Republican state Sen. Ralph Shortey is also on board with McCullough’s plan, but he said that he would allow any teacher with a concealed-carry permit to bring firearms into the school without additional training.

“When citizens have the liberty to protect themselves, they will do so, and they will do so responsibly,” Shortey told The Oklahoman.

You'll note, if you read the comments, that the place is infested with socialists, democrats and gun bigots; piles of invective, and not much else.

2 comments:

Does Mr. Jones think that a murderously insane teacher who wants to kill his child will stop because they can't legally bring the gun to school?

I seriously, seriously don't understand the thought process these people seem to have.

(Is the idea maybe that the teacher is only a little crazy-in-a-dangerous-way and is at that magical middle place where they'd have to have the gun already with them to be a threat to his kid, but at the same time all the screening already done would let them through?

Does he not realize that they barely screen police for mental issues?)

There's a simple thought experiment which usually pisses statists off no end;

supposedly (according to all stripes of statists including the mini-statists) because humans are bad, we need a state to keep us from diving straight into a Hobbesian war of all upon all.

Clearly, if we were all good, then even to the Hobbesians, there would be no need for a state.

But what if we were all absolutely evil?

The state would still comprise individual humans, all of whom would be absolutely evil. What purpose would that body of absolutely evil individuals serve?

as most of us are neither absolutely good, nor absolutely evil, but a mixture of the two, the statists fool themselves that somehow those who work for the state are blessed with divine virtue, annointed with magical statist pixie dust and produce shite which smells of roses.

But given the nature of the state; a monopolist of violent coercion, with powers to legally steal (tax), just what sort of individual is that going to attract?

add to that, the problems of monopoly, coupled with the observable traits we all share - we'd all prefer to earn more money rather than less money, and we'd all prefer to do less work to get it rather than more work, the state will always move in the trend of increasing its sphere of influence, absorbing more money and doing less work for it.

E-mail me

at elmtreeforge at att point net

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences. - C.S. Lewis

Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but y'all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this - they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave. - Capt. Mal

A Rifleman’s Prayer:Oh Lord, I would live my life in freedom, peace and happiness, enjoying the simple pleasures of hearth and home. I would die an old, old man in my own bed, preferably of sexual overexertion.

But if that is not to be, Lord, if monsters such as this should find their way to my little corner of the world on my watch, then help me to sweep those bastards from the ramparts, because doing that is good, and right, and just.

And if in this I should fall, let me be found atop a pile of brass, behind the wall I made of their corpses. Geek with a .45

"He's Black Council,", I said.

"Or maybe stupid," Ebenezar countered.

I thought about it. "Not sure which is scarier."

Ebenezar blinked at me, then snorted. "Stupid, Hoss. Every time. Only so many blackhearted villains in the world, and they only get uppity on occasion. Stupid's everywhere, every day." Ebenezar McCoy

“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition” ― Rudyard Kipling

This deprecation of individual freedom was objectionable to me. I am convinced now, as I was then, that man is an end because he is a child of God. Man is not made for the state; the state is made for man. To deprive man of freedom is to relegate him to the status of a thing, rather than elevate him to the status of a person. Man must never be treated as means to the end of the state; but always as an end within himself." Dr. M.L. King Jr.